The groundsman, the commentators, the general manager who played at the Wanderers on March 12, 2006, all spoke about the resemblance of the pitch to the 438 game, but the way the Lions started it took major rebuilding to go past 38. Seemingly surprised by Sydney Sixers' spin with new ball from both ends, the Lions batsmen played some average shots to be reduced to 9 for 4, and the little chance that Jean Symes' maiden T20 fifty provided them slipped through their palms with the drops of both the Sydney openers.

This was the second Champions League T20 title for a team from New South Wales; current champions Brad Haddin, Steve O'Keefe, Moises Henriques, Steve Smith and Ben Rohrer were part of the winning NSW squad in 2009 too. Like the previous final, Haddin almost missed this one with an injured thumb, but not only was he spot on with the call at the toss, he spun a rabbit out of his hat after putting Lions in.

Sixers' three fast bowlers could one day form the Australia Test attack, they have been the talk of the tournament, but they opened with two spinners on a pitch that reminded Stuart Clark of his six-over-54-run nightmare at the same venue six years ago. Nathan McCullum, who wasn't called upon to bowl and scored a golden duck in the semi-final, was to perform the opening act of the big night. And it seemed the tournament would get worse for him when Gulam Bodi lofted the third ball of the match over long-on.

Then the leading run-getter of the tournament, Bodi, didn't pause for a breath, and top-edged the next ball straight to deep square leg. A little more meat behind the mis-hit, and it might have travelled all the way in the rarefied Highveld air, and McCullum would have been 13 runs down. As it turned out, it was to be the night of the man from southern New Zealand playing for a southern Australian state.

The rest of the Lions top order then, seemingly over-reaching on the flat track, played some ordinary shots. Quinton de Kock and Neil McKenzie swiped across the line for top edges, and continuing with the momentum O'Keefe snared captain Alviro Petersen with one that turned across him. Symes then put up a lesson for his mates. His hitting through the line and along the ground showed the pitch was flat as expected, and that the shot selection hadn't been spot on.

After the promotion of Sohail Tanvir flopped to make it 32 for 5, Symes added 41 with the hit-and-miss Thami Tsolekile and 38 with the big-hitting Dwaine Pretorius. During the second of those partnerships, Sixers began to make a few mistakes in the field, but Rohrer roared back with a direct hit from point to run Pretorius out. That was Lions' final slide as they lost their last four wickets for 10.

The injured Haddin came out to open with Michael Lumb, and they were cautious against Sohail Tanvir and Dirk Nannes, reaching only 23 after five overs. At the first sight of spin, Lumb tried to break free, but Bodi dropped him at long-off. In the next over, it was Haddin's turn to be dropped, by Pretorius at deep square leg. There wasn't to be a third chance. Just to rub it in, though, Lumb overtook the man who dropped him, Bodi, as the leading run-scorer of the tournament. Mitchell Starc led the wickets tally to make it a clean sweep for Sixers.

@Indraneel Mandal - great comments! Keep it coming! Unfortunately the answer to your very last question is - NO!

POSTED BY
BobCo
on | October 29, 2012, 17:36 GMT

@unregisteredalien: I'm an Australian, and am well aware of its history. You can reason the naming in the way you have all you like and plenty of authors have given other, just as "reasonable" arguments, but the plain fact is (and any professor of australian history, not to mention a great cross-section of books on Australia's early "white" history, will tell you the same) we don't know why Cook named the place New South Wales -- he left no documentation whatsoever regarding it. We don't even know if/why he was referring to Wales -- he had basically no connections with the area either. Whatever your source for your claim for the naming of NSW, its not factual. Sorry.

And yes, I _know_ NSW is an eastern state. That was my whole point. The _article_ (not me!) claims that it is a southern state -- I think the phrase they used was "a NZder from the south island playing for a southern Australian state", in reference to McCullum. But never let a fact get in the way of a good story, huh?!

POSTED BY
davidtt
on | October 29, 2012, 15:48 GMT

Most uninteresting champions league thus far. Thumbs up to the organisers. T20 is an insult to the true art and class of batting an bowling..and should not be compared to test cricket. However though T20 has its place in the future of cricket..we as cricket fans should not condemn test cricket because there lies the history of our great legends who still cannot be surpassed by these "so called T20 cricketers".
When interest in this type of cricket emerged in the Hong Kong sixes, it certainly raised fan interest, but it was simply a slogging competition..and not a cricket competition....Leave test match cricket alone!

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 15:48 GMT

A five day game with twists and turns cannot be matched by ODIs and T20s, even if it is like the second semi-final of the just-concluded CLT20. Of course you need guts and gumption for that. If you play for a draw or a team bats like the Lankans once did just to score a record Test total against the Indians, things become bearing and it will drive away rather than attract fans.
As far as the CLT20 is concerned, the format was absolute crap. It should be like the original Champions League in Europe (supposedly the 'inspiration' for the 'copycat') where top teams from all countries afre seeded directly while others come through the qualifiers. Why should only teams from India. Australia and SA fill up the automatic qualifiers? Just because they are the main sponsors of the tournament? Then the name of the tournament needs to be changed.
On a sidenote, do people posting comments always have to behave like brutes? Can't we have a civilised discusion without pointing fingers at one anothr

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 15:37 GMT

I'm happy that no IPL team won. None of them deserved to. Ultimately, as in the T20 World Cup, the best two teams played it out in the final. However, that does not mean that T20s will deliver 'fair' results when other formats can't. A T20 game like is like an tennis match with only one set. That way anybody can beat anybody else; it proves nothing. If you are really good you have to prove yourself in the ODIs and Tests. The good thing about T20s is that it allows the weaker teams to put up a fight against or even beat the stronger outfits.
ODIs and T20s are simply about holding your own nerves while forcing your opponents to commit mistakes. Of course you have to strategise; but you need much superior strategies to win Tests, specially away from home. The beautiful thing about Tests is that even if things don't go well in one session or innings, you can always learn from mistakes and come back. ODIs or T20s shut out that possibility by limiting the overs.

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 15:22 GMT

Would like to add my own two cents to the T20 vs Tests debate. The difference was nicely pointed out by Harsha a few days ago when he compared Tests to classic music. We need one format to 'globalise' the game and another for the so-called purists.
I am probably in the minority when I say that all 3 forms (including much maligned ODIs) can co-exist. There, I said it! ODIs should be restricted to tournaments like the World Cup, Asia Cup, etc (I refuse to accept that the T20 World Cup has the same stature or history as the 50 over version).
I might be ruffling quite a few feathers here, but I feel that an overdose of games may kill the T20s, just like it happend to ODIs. What we need is everything in moderation. Having two 'world class' (don't know whether the CLT20 can be called that) was an absolutely dumb idea. I had almost zero interest in the latter, and I am sure many others felt the same. If the 'golden goose' is to be killed, then this is the way to go.
BTW I am an Indian.

POSTED BY
akhilesh0109
on | October 29, 2012, 13:54 GMT

this match reminded me of the 2007 world cup semi between aus n south africa. a top order collapse, less than competitive score and an easy chase..
http://www.espncricinfo.com/wc2007/engine/current/match/247506.html

POSTED BY
Sakthiivel
on | October 29, 2012, 13:22 GMT

Well done Sixers and well played Lions. Wonderful tournament.

POSTED BY
eyballfallenout
on | October 29, 2012, 12:54 GMT

@Marcio, spot on there! i love it, that wide wide one batsman flashes just goes past the edge to the keeper, oohhhhh! theres nothing better than test cricket....

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 12:25 GMT

Ha ! Ha! Ha! Four Indian teams & not one reached the finals! Go Australia go!

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 30, 2012, 0:05 GMT

@Indraneel Mandal - great comments! Keep it coming! Unfortunately the answer to your very last question is - NO!

POSTED BY
BobCo
on | October 29, 2012, 17:36 GMT

@unregisteredalien: I'm an Australian, and am well aware of its history. You can reason the naming in the way you have all you like and plenty of authors have given other, just as "reasonable" arguments, but the plain fact is (and any professor of australian history, not to mention a great cross-section of books on Australia's early "white" history, will tell you the same) we don't know why Cook named the place New South Wales -- he left no documentation whatsoever regarding it. We don't even know if/why he was referring to Wales -- he had basically no connections with the area either. Whatever your source for your claim for the naming of NSW, its not factual. Sorry.

And yes, I _know_ NSW is an eastern state. That was my whole point. The _article_ (not me!) claims that it is a southern state -- I think the phrase they used was "a NZder from the south island playing for a southern Australian state", in reference to McCullum. But never let a fact get in the way of a good story, huh?!

POSTED BY
davidtt
on | October 29, 2012, 15:48 GMT

Most uninteresting champions league thus far. Thumbs up to the organisers. T20 is an insult to the true art and class of batting an bowling..and should not be compared to test cricket. However though T20 has its place in the future of cricket..we as cricket fans should not condemn test cricket because there lies the history of our great legends who still cannot be surpassed by these "so called T20 cricketers".
When interest in this type of cricket emerged in the Hong Kong sixes, it certainly raised fan interest, but it was simply a slogging competition..and not a cricket competition....Leave test match cricket alone!

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 15:48 GMT

A five day game with twists and turns cannot be matched by ODIs and T20s, even if it is like the second semi-final of the just-concluded CLT20. Of course you need guts and gumption for that. If you play for a draw or a team bats like the Lankans once did just to score a record Test total against the Indians, things become bearing and it will drive away rather than attract fans.
As far as the CLT20 is concerned, the format was absolute crap. It should be like the original Champions League in Europe (supposedly the 'inspiration' for the 'copycat') where top teams from all countries afre seeded directly while others come through the qualifiers. Why should only teams from India. Australia and SA fill up the automatic qualifiers? Just because they are the main sponsors of the tournament? Then the name of the tournament needs to be changed.
On a sidenote, do people posting comments always have to behave like brutes? Can't we have a civilised discusion without pointing fingers at one anothr

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 15:37 GMT

I'm happy that no IPL team won. None of them deserved to. Ultimately, as in the T20 World Cup, the best two teams played it out in the final. However, that does not mean that T20s will deliver 'fair' results when other formats can't. A T20 game like is like an tennis match with only one set. That way anybody can beat anybody else; it proves nothing. If you are really good you have to prove yourself in the ODIs and Tests. The good thing about T20s is that it allows the weaker teams to put up a fight against or even beat the stronger outfits.
ODIs and T20s are simply about holding your own nerves while forcing your opponents to commit mistakes. Of course you have to strategise; but you need much superior strategies to win Tests, specially away from home. The beautiful thing about Tests is that even if things don't go well in one session or innings, you can always learn from mistakes and come back. ODIs or T20s shut out that possibility by limiting the overs.

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 15:22 GMT

Would like to add my own two cents to the T20 vs Tests debate. The difference was nicely pointed out by Harsha a few days ago when he compared Tests to classic music. We need one format to 'globalise' the game and another for the so-called purists.
I am probably in the minority when I say that all 3 forms (including much maligned ODIs) can co-exist. There, I said it! ODIs should be restricted to tournaments like the World Cup, Asia Cup, etc (I refuse to accept that the T20 World Cup has the same stature or history as the 50 over version).
I might be ruffling quite a few feathers here, but I feel that an overdose of games may kill the T20s, just like it happend to ODIs. What we need is everything in moderation. Having two 'world class' (don't know whether the CLT20 can be called that) was an absolutely dumb idea. I had almost zero interest in the latter, and I am sure many others felt the same. If the 'golden goose' is to be killed, then this is the way to go.
BTW I am an Indian.

POSTED BY
akhilesh0109
on | October 29, 2012, 13:54 GMT

this match reminded me of the 2007 world cup semi between aus n south africa. a top order collapse, less than competitive score and an easy chase..
http://www.espncricinfo.com/wc2007/engine/current/match/247506.html

POSTED BY
Sakthiivel
on | October 29, 2012, 13:22 GMT

Well done Sixers and well played Lions. Wonderful tournament.

POSTED BY
eyballfallenout
on | October 29, 2012, 12:54 GMT

@Marcio, spot on there! i love it, that wide wide one batsman flashes just goes past the edge to the keeper, oohhhhh! theres nothing better than test cricket....

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 12:25 GMT

Ha ! Ha! Ha! Four Indian teams & not one reached the finals! Go Australia go!

POSTED BY
RandyOZ
on | October 29, 2012, 11:17 GMT

Australia dominate once again. Soon to be number 1, Australia has incredible depth.

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 29, 2012, 11:07 GMT

@bobmartin on (October 29 2012, 09:19 AM GMT) - it would also solve the UDRS impasse!

POSTED BY
satish619chandar
on | October 29, 2012, 10:35 GMT

IT is really worrying to see people bash T20 cricket. Let T20 have its own fans. First of all, why did T20 arise? To make cricket a global sport. People say no favorites in T20 as any team can win on a day. Isn't it what you watch the game for? BD vs Aus 1. Test cricket - Surely Aussies win with little resistance. BD might win 1 in 30 games. 2. ODI - BD will pose challenge on their pitches. BD 1 in 20 games. 3. If BD big hitters get going, they can really threaten Australia on their day. Certainly BD can win in 1 out of 5 games. T20 actually provides level play field with teams starting equally rather than tests. Test is the purest form of cricket but T20 will have its own fans too. Let "Pure test fans" watch their game without disturbing the other formats.

POSTED BY
himohan007
on | October 29, 2012, 9:57 GMT

@WickyRoy.paklover WOW that was a nice comment. Why cant u say something about Pak pitch that could not contain test match lol.

POSTED BY
MakaveliDon
on | October 29, 2012, 9:54 GMT

For those of you arguing about why test cricket is more important than t20 that is the main reason why cricket is hardly played by many countries compared to football. In this fast pacing world who honestly has time to watch 5 days of batsman just tapping or leaving the ball, even my friends used to ask me why do you watch cricket its so boring you'd have to be really bored or unemployed to watch that. Then I showed them t20 cricket and they loved it. So the answer to cricket spreading around the world is t20 simple as that. Test cricket is dead to the world except for those who still cling onto the past.

POSTED BY
bobmartin
on | October 29, 2012, 9:19 GMT

I've got a great idea... Since it seems that most of the comments stating that test cricket is dead come from Indian supporters, why not kick India out of the top 10 test playing nations and let Ireland join.. It would kill two birds with one stone.. India could concentrate 100% on the various T20 tournaments, as opposed to the 75% currently, and Ireland would get its long awaited wish.

POSTED BY
Selassie-I
on | October 29, 2012, 9:11 GMT

Well played Sixers! looked to me like the best team in the tournament, nice to see a non-IPL team win it, even with them having half the automatic qualification spots! Although there probably was some fatigue for the internationals here. Nice allround performance from an Englishman and a Kiwi in there too!

POSTED BY
WickyRoy.paklover
on | October 29, 2012, 8:54 GMT

@Meety,thanks 4 applauding,my point z problem z with the nature of surfaces in subcontinent not with dis format,EVEN THOUGH MY PAK TEAM DOESN'T HOLD GREAT RECORD IN AUS,BT frankly speaking test cricket z worth watching when it is played in aus,eng n even in proteas land,uae,dubai simply bcoz of more no. Of result oriented matches than in sl or ind.

POSTED BY
LazloWoodbine
on | October 29, 2012, 7:58 GMT

@jonesy2 - I see what you did there, fella! LOL!

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 29, 2012, 7:56 GMT

@WickyRoy.paklover on (October 29 2012, 07:12 AM GMT) - that is a great comment! That is the essence as to why Test cricket is favoured by traditionalists - it is (or should be) a contest between bat & ball. Whether it be on a bouncy seaming strip, or a turning strip - runs should be made with skill rather than by riding your luck!
@Chris_P on (October 29 2012, 03:48 AM GMT) - I am assuming Cap't Meanster's opinions are based on the fact that he lives in Canada & not only does he have limited to exposure/chances to playing the game - limited opportunities to actually see Test cricket.

POSTED BY
WickyRoy.paklover
on | October 29, 2012, 7:36 GMT

@Pras punter,well there r stil lots of fans 4rm subcntinent who hail tests,odis just as much as t20s if not more@hlns,sixers batsmen were as destructive as ponting,martyn were against indian bowlrs in 2003 Wcup.

POSTED BY
rickyvoncanterbury
on | October 29, 2012, 7:32 GMT

congrats to the sixers, but like everyone else (except a few) to even consider that the WC20/20 or CL20/20 compares to the upcoming series in Australia or India should go onto some of the atricles re India, then tell me that test cricket is dead in India, and i do not need to read any articles to tell you its not dead in Australia, England or South Africa, and i remember the Irish supporters begging for test status during the world cup. long live test cricket.

POSTED BY
WickyRoy.paklover
on | October 29, 2012, 7:12 GMT

@Cpt Meanster,u n many people like u getting bored of tests has lot to do with nature of pitches at most of ur venues if not all.TEST CRICKT Z FAR FROM BORING At most of venues in Aus, Eng,N UAE,DUBAI.WHILE CRICKET Z MOST BORING IF IT Z played at Colombo,Eden gardens to name a few,simply bcoz of Road like nature as well as non-result oriented nature of these 2 along many venues in this region,i Agree i can't spare time to watch ball by ball bt it doesn't mean that i hate test cricket as long as it provides balance btwen ball n bat. I KNOW ALL WICKETS IN ENG,AUS R NOT BOWLING FRIENDLY BT EVEN THEY PROVID SOMETHING,SAME CAN BE SAID ABOUT UAE,DUBAI.

POSTED BY
Percy_Fender
on | October 29, 2012, 6:36 GMT

Congratulations to Sydney sixers for having won the CL of 20/20. It is even ore creditable because Shane Watson was not in the side having rushed off to a greater urgency awaiting CA. The South Africans. In this series SS was clearly the best side on view with the crop of upcoming quickies. I thought Staarc, Hazelwood Henriques and Cummins were very good even if there are a couple of South Africans who will be heard of in the future like Symes,Morris and Bodi.The wickets favoured the Australians and South Africans but the Indian teams were decent enough without much luck after a slow start. A fair tournament and a fair result too.

POSTED BY
hnlns
on | October 29, 2012, 5:25 GMT

The way Lions caved in was very disappointing. This in some ways resembled the WC 99 final in England where Pakistan blew it away similarly against Aussies.

POSTED BY
derpherp
on | October 29, 2012, 5:16 GMT

@Cpt.Meanster well that is your opinion. But i wholeheartly disagree with it. It may be the cultural differences but in Australia we love all forms of cricket, especially Test. I fail to see how you can be a "fan" of the game since 1996 and not like test cricket? Unless you could predict the future and the arrival T20 i really can't see how you managed to stay a fan of the game for all that time. I also seriously doubt that "millions" of other cricket fans feel the same way about test cricket as you do. Well it is only your opinion after all and its a shame you don't enjoy the most pure form of the game. But i can say with absolute confidents that you are in the minority here. Maybe cricket isn't the sport for you.

POSTED BY
PrasPunter
on | October 29, 2012, 4:56 GMT

If people seek entertainment, they better go and watch movies or the clown-acts
in a circus. Sport is not that. In the form of so-called entertainment, t20
just spoils the beauty of the game. The sub-continent teams might like it,
but I bet Aus, SA and Eng on any day would place a higher premium on
test cricket than this hit-and-giggle-aloud stuff. Bring on test-cricket.

POSTED BY
PrasPunter
on | October 29, 2012, 4:53 GMT

As good as it gets, on any day, I would prefer to see us winning the series
against SA than winning some hit and giggle stuff. Who cares about t20 ? I
would, on any day, rate the test series against SA and Eng more than anything
else. T20 is an embarassment to cricket.

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 4:51 GMT

This is real T20 cricket. Indeed enjoyed the match. Sydney openers started very slowly and finished the game brilliantly without losing any wicket. Excellant!!!!

POSTED BY
jonesy2
on | October 29, 2012, 4:37 GMT

i think we can safely say that this was the most dominant performance throughout a tournament by a cricket team and that the sydney sixers are the greatest domestic team in history of cricket and mitchell starc is the best bowler in the world in t20s.

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 4:09 GMT

Nothing to say when an australian team is in full form no chance for opponents to stand against them. They are like Australian 'A' but when those players plays for other teams like Steve smith - Pune, Henriques - Mumbai, KKR then Lumb - royals, Haddin - KKR and so on didnt succeed in their respective leagues outside their continent. Well played sixers.

POSTED BY
Chris_P
on | October 29, 2012, 3:48 GMT

@Cpt.Meanster. From a perspective of arguably a far different culture, I am truly sorry you never had the opportunity (assuming you didn't) to play in an organized cricket competition. I can see your pov & your points. I don't agree with them, but you are certainly entitled to them, I think to date, the points have been well posted & responded without derision. To have played or to play does bring out a far different reaction (based by what others have written here as well). I also understand that T20 is the way to go if you want to penetrate the US market, but from a purist cricket pov, people prefer tests, & first class. Someone else pointed it out, but I prefer our 2 day club level cricket than the one day stuff or the 2 by T20 stuff we have to play. It seems here, at least, that is the majority thinking, thereby our laid back views on T20. Well wishes to those in whatever you prefer.

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 29, 2012, 3:20 GMT

@Scott James - I started off agreeing with you, but the further you went I disagreed. Minor differnece but I would say a perfect bilateral series against well ranked nations would be 4 or 5 tests, 3 ODIs & 1 T20 (the 20/20 played as a entree before the ODIs). As far as the W/Cup - it can & should be shortened, however I like @Ahmed Hussain believe that lowering the number of teams is counter-productive to the concept of a WORLD Cup. Who knows Ireland could be the next NZ of the cricket world, forever punching above their weight or Afghanistan could be the next Pakistan, unpredictable winning impossible matches & losing unlosable ones - the ODI W/Cup is an important stepping stone for fledgling nations. If we split a W/Cup into 4 groups of 4, then go straight to QTR finals, we can cut about 20 matches (of varying degrees of uselessness) out of the itinary - EVERY match would have context. The last ODI W/Cup was designed to give a comfort zone to nations like India.

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 29, 2012, 3:13 GMT

@Infrared on (October 29 2012, 00:53 AM GMT) - I would argue that weather can totally stuff a T20 match up as well. Case in point - the SL v Saffa W/Cup match this year. Ended up being a 6 or 7 over a-side match - a joke! I am happy that some cricket fans like/love T20, I am even more happy that almost non-cricket fans really love T20. As far as sports being about short duration - tell that to a) Kenyan marathon runner, b) Tennis player playing a 5hr match, c) A golfer! If you haven't got the attention span to enjoy the quirks & nuiances of Test cricket that is okay, all I was trying to say is that your opinion is certainly not a view that is supported by true cricket fans everywhere!
@ Akshita29 on (October 28 2012, 23:37 PM GMT) - I wouldn't want that to happen, but I could live with just the Ashes forever!

POSTED BY
solankibhavesh
on | October 29, 2012, 2:31 GMT

I follow all fromate of cricket and ODI & Test cricket are the best cricket and by this we can judge the player how far he will paly. T20 cricket is like entertainment nothing and the way to earn money as early as possible and now days people have no long time to watch one day cricket or five days cricket they need quick result. But when we are talking about Player with ODI and Test cricket on one can produce good player. Tell me who is the best T20 player then he become good test player or ODI player may be the number is less but we large number of player those are best Test and ODI player and Then become good T20 player so Test cricket is real cricket and T20 is ok its for fun

POSTED BY
Marcio
on | October 29, 2012, 2:20 GMT

If some people prefer T20 then so be it. But most people who have played cricket really enjoy watching the longer formats, as they know what goes into "mundane" parts of the game like a defesive shot, a batsman ducking out of the way off a bouncer, a spinner tempting a batsman with a wider, slower delivery, and so on. To someone who doesn't know the game, these look like "nothing is happening". How wrong they are! Maybe India is like China (where I live). To generalise, the Chinese spend most of their time in shopping malls, have their heads in computers & gadgets all day, & have lost the ability to be present - or to enjoy simple pleasures like reading or even walking in nature. Life is all about chasing $ & instant amusement. If India is becoming like this, it might explain their inability to value test cricket. With T20 I get frustrated when I see great balls from quicks edged for 4 (no slips), & games won/lost with 2 overs of lucky slogging by fast bowlers at the end of the game.

POSTED BY
srriaj317
on | October 29, 2012, 2:19 GMT

@Infrared: Your questioning of the "unnecessary tea-break" is an indicator that you haven't played the long form of the game and that's why you are so fascinated with T20s. When you are bowling 80 to 100 overs a day, a tea break does help the fielding side. And ask anyone who has played a certain level of cricket - T20s are at best pre-season warm-ups to get our arms swinging. Even at club level, 2-day games are the ones we want to play. Oh, and talking about the tea break, what do you think about those time-outs in IPL - unnecessary or a godsend?

POSTED BY
ifrakurshid
on | October 29, 2012, 2:13 GMT

SYDENY SIXEX SPINS LION BY TAIL TO OUT CLASS THEM IN ALL DEPARTMENT OF T-20 A GOOD TOSS TO LOOSE. THE STRONG BASE OF AUSTRALIN CRICKET SHOWS THEIR FUTURE BENCH STRENGTH AND GRADUAL REPLACEMENT ON INTERNATIONAL CRICKET SCENE BY AUSSIES IS NOT FAR congurts 2 sydeny sixes also taking the GOLDEN bat and wickets award ARE THE EXTRA FEATHER IN THEIR CAPS. THE LIONS APPROACH WAS VERY CHILDISH NEEDS MORE INTERNATION CRICKET EXPERIENCE THEY HAVE THE POTENTIALS TO DO MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SHOWED TO THE WORLD ON A DAY WHEN WEATHER WAS KIND AND FAIR TO BOTH THE TEAMS PUNTERS EXPLOITED AND GOT THEIR RETURNS THANKING THE NEW CHAMPIONS AS SOUTH AFRICA WAS REWARDED TO WIN THE HONGKONG TROPHY BALANCING THE BENIFITS TO sa cricketers & MANAGERS IN GENERAL. CONGRATULATIONS TO ICC FOR HOLDING ANOTHER CRICKET EVANT IN A BEFITTING MANNER INSPITE OF RAINY SEASON IN SOUTH AFRICA. AN OLD SAYING WHERE THIER IS NO rain PLAY CRICKET u will be wet. LETS GO TO LONDON TO SEE THE QUEEN FOR 50/50 MATCHES

POSTED BY
disco_bob
on | October 29, 2012, 2:12 GMT

@Captainmeanster, comparing t20 to Test cricket is like comparing Bohemian Rhapsody to The Marriage of Figaro.

POSTED BY
Chris_P
on | October 29, 2012, 2:10 GMT

@ Infrared. "Sports are about short duration"? I would gather by that statement that you have never sat through a golf tournament nor a 2 week tennis gland slam. And don't start me about American football, I would suggest that those with limited attention spans or patience appreciate the fast food variety of sports. How about when the hype of T20 dies we just go to super over format, that would really pack them in!

POSTED BY
disco_bob
on | October 29, 2012, 2:04 GMT

@Cpt.Meanster, if a Test side gets bowled out for 150 and end up 'chasing leather', then there is usually still a contest going on. Look at the crazy Test match when Aus were last in SA. Both sides were bowled out cheaply, still fun to watch. However in this particular T20 final, the fans may as well go home after the first 10 mins because it was clear that there was no contest from that point on.

POSTED BY
gudolerhum
on | October 29, 2012, 1:58 GMT

Test cricket will/should never die. Fifty overs brought a new dimension to the game and Test cricket improved. T20 has brought several new dimensions - better fielding, more thinking by bowlers and strategic planning by captains and coaches - and Test cricket is benefiting from these aspects. The real game will endure and continue to evolve and improve given the opportunity. There is a place for all three formats once the scheduling can be better organised and money does not spoil the whole show.

POSTED BY
Smithie
on | October 29, 2012, 1:54 GMT

@Cpt Meanster what was that about the Sixers being bridesmaids that you were chirping a few days back ?????

POSTED BY
perl57
on | October 29, 2012, 1:53 GMT

Well Done Sydney. Commensurations to all those who participated but this was the lousiest of the Champions league ever due to rains. I guess in that way Sydney was a bit lucky. No excuses for IPL teams and it is for better that they lost for it would be better to prepare to give England a thrashing of their life time.

POSTED BY
Cpt.Meanster
on | October 29, 2012, 1:18 GMT

@derpherp: Yes, I never played cricket in my life. Does that mean I am any less knowledgeable about the game ? I have followed cricket since 1996 and let me tell you, I NEVER enjoyed tests. They are long and boring. At the end of the day, tests should be meaningful. But with all the meaningless ICC fixtures, it's hard to say that. Nobody has time to watch test cricket for 5 precious days. Do you know how many better things I can do in that time ? T20s on the other hand are just 3 hours in duration, more fun and exciting, and result oriented. I am not alone here my friend. There are millions of people who share my view on tests. The ICC should take a stern decision regarding the end of tests in the next decade. The reality is that test cricket is already dead in places like India. Domestic Ranji Trophy games are watched by a few kids and a dog. I won't be surprised if the same happens come November 15 in Ahmedabad.

POSTED BY
Cpt.Meanster
on | October 29, 2012, 1:12 GMT

@Scott Jones: Sorry buddy, have to disagree with you. You say T20 rides on having nothing on the outcome. Well, tell that to the Highveld Lions who lost to the Sixers. The look of disappointment on the faces of the Wanderers' crowd and the team members of the Lions will tell you otherwise. T20 or not, cricket has a MEANING, no matter what format it takes. Whether I am in the minority or not is not important. What's important is that test cricket's position in world cricket is under the radar. The old lady has to retire to her cosy cottage in the woods, never to come back. Her daughter T20 is beautiful, youthful and attractive. T20 is the ONLY format that can be spread around the world. Tests are long, and slow. While it may be the oldest form of the sport, it's by no means the 'be all and end all' of cricket. Most people simply don't have time for it. We have to be realistic here instead of arguing for the sake of arguing.

POSTED BY
unregisteredalien
on | October 29, 2012, 0:59 GMT

BobCo: "New" because it was a new land (Aboriginal settlement didn't count as far as European explorers were concerned), "South" because it is in the southern hemisphere, and "Wales" because it reminded him of parts of Wales. Just because you don't know doesn't mean nobody knows! And yes, NSW is an eastern state of Australia.

POSTED BY
TheRisingTeam
on | October 29, 2012, 0:53 GMT

@Meety - You reminded me that weather is another major problem with test Cricket may be the ultimate version of Cricket but in this 21st century dressed in whites old fashioned hats which has a short unnecessary tea break please!!! Sports are all about short duration and entertainment and ODIs and T20s are exactly that. Only reason ODIs is getting stiff is because too many meaningless series are being played and tournaments i.e. Champions Trophy otherwise there wouldn't be any problems with 50 over Cricket. Even places like USA and Canada are interested in Cricket now and planning to set up T20 leagues. Cricket is arising to a whole different level now which I must say truly deserves. The younger generation are not interested in test Cricket and because their eyes are glued to T20 all the time.

POSTED BY
on | October 29, 2012, 0:44 GMT

@Scott Jones: "Limit participants in the ODI World Cup to the top eight or ten teams in the world"??? - Totally disagree first of all what is 'World Cup' to you? having 8 teams does not deserve the title 'World' because there are more than 200 nations just call it '8 team cup' so the world which is not fond of Cricket knows what state Cricket truly is I'm sorry to say. I agree in the 50 over version, the World Cup should not last 6 weeks and cut from 14 to 12 teams if I honestly must say with teams ranked 09-12 having to go through qualifying phase and compete with the rest of the bottom tier which is fair enough.

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 23:51 GMT

@ Cpt.Meanster - seems like you areclearly in the minority . I wil only watch Test cricket and MEANINGFUL ODIs (World Cup etc). T20 and to some extent the 50 over are played way too much and with nothing riding on the outcome. A perfect bilateral series would be at least three Test matches, three ODIs and zero T20 matches. Also, all the fluff should be cut from the World Cup. Limit participants in the ODI World Cup to the top eight or ten teams in the world.

POSTED BY
derpherp
on | October 28, 2012, 23:48 GMT

@Cpt.Meanster haha T20 are as real as tests? You have to be kidding me.. Maybe for the non-cricketer like yourself, but for someone who plays the game and has followed it for years, test cricket is the true form. No player will ever be ranked as a great or a legend of the game by playing T20. Test is where you see how good a player is, where every skill they have learnt is tested. You will not see this in the "rocks or diamonds" version of cricket. And it is entertaining, getting your mates over to your place, firing up the barbie and watching the game, or going to the ground, experiencing the atmosphere and socialising with different people. Awesome day out. T20 can be entertaining, but only every 1-5 games is. Basically T20 is for children.

POSTED BY
disco_bob
on | October 28, 2012, 23:48 GMT

Appropriate to see such an ordinary T20 final to remind us that RealCricket™ begins at the Gabba on 9th

POSTED BY
Chris_P
on | October 28, 2012, 23:40 GMT

@Infrared. Perhaps your point may be correct in your country, but certainly here, test cricket thrives. If you watched India's tour down under, all tests were well attended, even after the series was decided. Ashes tests are nearly sellouts, Indian & South African near sell outs. There are less people attending T20 matches or ODI finals than day 1 of most tests. Most tests are draws? Better check your stats, you are way out on that point. Let us revisit T20 in 20 years to see the sustainability of it. The same was said about ODI's & it now struggles to draw high attendances where as tests, certainly in England & Australia draw well. Perhaps it is a case for each country, but down here, T20 is thought of very little.

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 28, 2012, 23:40 GMT

@Infrared on (October 28 2012, 22:51 PM GMT) - depends where you live mate. I disagree with the comment "Test Cricket even for 5 days most results still end up in draws what a waste" - most tests these days have result - unless severely affected by weather. In Oz, the last 11 tests have had results. They still had results in England in most of the tests despite the wettest summer in a long time. Also, a test can be very exciting even if it is a draw or tie, recent examples is the draw in India against WI where it went to the last ball, the Ashes draw in Cradiff in 2009.

POSTED BY
Akshita29
on | October 28, 2012, 23:37 GMT

@capmeanster You are correct mate about that there is less and less time for people to watch 5 day test matches , But still test matches has it's own charm . But its unfortunate that may be few years from now on we would see only Ashes as the only test series surviving .

POSTED BY
Chris_P
on | October 28, 2012, 23:31 GMT

@Cpt.Meanster. I play all formats currently, let me totally reassure you, T20 is not cricket. As stated previously, it is sports entertainment played with cricket gear. It is the same as McDonalds vs. al-la-carte, Both feed you, but totally different ways. In no way does this reflect what cricket is supposed to represent. T20 form does not reflect what is required for tests. For those who enjoy it, good luck, but certainly interest here is for the true test of cricket abilities, but to each their own.

POSTED BY
TheRisingTeam
on | October 28, 2012, 22:51 GMT

Cpt.Meanster actually makes a point T20 Cricket is what revived Cricket since its inception in 2003 because many people at that time started to get bored of Cricket until the introduction of that format and other things like powerplays. Test Cricket even for 5 days most results still end up in draws what a waste. Timeless Cricket is real Cricket but even if you read history with that form its still difficult and long to get results. T20s and ODIs are the blockbusters of Cricket now lets face it.

POSTED BY
crow_eater
on | October 28, 2012, 22:42 GMT

Well done Sydney, sticks in my throat to say it but they played a great game & tournament. But a word of advice from Redbacks experience, don't spend the money till the cheque arrives, even then wait till it's cashed!

POSTED BY
Cpt.Meanster
on | October 28, 2012, 22:31 GMT

@CoorparooMaverick: Please blame the Highveld Lions for choking at the wrong time. Do not blame the format. As if such one sided games don't happen in tests or ODIs. We have all seen instances in tests where a team gets bowled out for 150 odd in their innings and then end up chasing leather for the rest of the game. It's funny people are okay with one sided tests and lousy ODIs instead of a short and sweet format such as T20 where teams have to play WELL from ball one to deservedly win games.

POSTED BY
PFEL
on | October 28, 2012, 22:23 GMT

Ironic that the 2 best performers in final for Sydney were a Kiwi and a South African :P

POSTED BY
Cpt.Meanster
on | October 28, 2012, 22:08 GMT

@Chris_P: Sorry to say this bud but you got the WRONG term for the WRONG format. Hit n giggle cricket is Hong Kong Sixes, not T20. Besides, WHAT is real cricket ? You mean test cricket ? Test cricket, while the primary and oldest format of the sport, is by no means even HALF entertaining as T20s. It's long, boring and a total waste of time. I only watch it in the form of highlights. I am not the only one either. There are MILLIONS of hidden cricket fans afraid to speak out against test cricket. I am not one of them. However, that doesn't mean I don't care about what's happening in test series around the world. But I do know the game's most exciting format when I see one. To me T20s are as real as tests.

POSTED BY
CoorparooMaverick
on | October 28, 2012, 21:31 GMT

Aah T20, what quality games it produces. A 40 over game that was over by the 4th over makes great viewing does it not.

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 21:19 GMT

This form of Cricket is fine and here to stay, people may not like the Tournaments if their Teams dont win or essay a challenge. It was an emphatic win for Sydney Sixers after Taming the Lions, who had mauled most of the high Profile Cricketers from around the world representing the various clubs. It was the most consistent performance by far in the short span of the Champions League T20. The game of Cricket won in the end...whether it was entertaining for the losing teams supporters.

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 28, 2012, 20:57 GMT

Also - I suppose the way the Sixers were captained, gives an indicator why Haddin is so wanted by his team mates in the Baggy Green? He was a very good captain of NSW prior to being selected for Oz, often guiding depleted NSW sides into the Shield finals. So a nice reward for a good bloke!

POSTED BY
Meety
on | October 28, 2012, 20:51 GMT

Didn't think Sydney would win the comp undefeated. So I was slightly surprised that they not only won, but racked up a 10 wicket win. All of this with half a team. I felt the imports hadn't contributed much thru the tournament, but Lumb & McCullum certainly chose a good time to do so. Well done to Lions for making it to the Final, their only two losses were to the best team in the comp. Sorry for them that their top order put in a shocker.
== == ==
IMO - whilst Starc was very good, my money for player of the tournament would of been Hazlewood. Also - whilst Lumbs innings compounded the margin of victory for the Sixers, really think a bowler should of got the man of the match.

POSTED BY
Chris_P
on | October 28, 2012, 20:49 GMT

Too bad the final was a blowout. This happens in this format to teams whether they are good or not so good. SS thoroughly deserved it, but now this hit & giggle is over, let's get back to the real cricket. I am really glad Watson was brought back & given time to rest & prepare for tests.

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 20:46 GMT

Finally the tournament is over :P

POSTED BY
dinosaurus
on | October 28, 2012, 20:17 GMT

@Zan46,

Explain to me how a team that won every game, even one when the opposition finished in a blaze of 72 runs in 4 overs, is not the best team.

POSTED BY
BG4cricket
on | October 28, 2012, 20:11 GMT

How easy was that and without Watto for the big games as well. Certainly conditions were favourable to the Sixers attack throughout the tournament but the fact is they have a really well balanced side. For the whiners complaining about how hard done by the IPL teams were it would be useful to remember that teams had to release players to IPL sides and remember the Sixers were sans Lee and Bravo as well. BTW - what more does O'Keefe need to do to get games over players like Doherty and Hogg in the short forms if the game for Australia ?

POSTED BY
one-eyed-but-keepinitreal
on | October 28, 2012, 19:57 GMT

@AzAb12754 - 20/20 is a joke (hit and giggle) competition and I would argue, for this reason, the CL20/20 was far superior to the recent 20/20 WC (pretense of seriousness). 20/20 is a fickle game designed as a spectacle to allow any game to be won by a poorly performed team based on an individual. For example, T&T were almost able to beat a vastly superior NSW a couple of years ago becuase of Pollard. Thus, it was a surprise that the best team actually won the CL. As a NSW supporter, at the provincial level, I have seen my team split in two and some of the remains farmed to other sides (Lee, Bollinger, etc). Two of the sixers best performers in the final are imports (Lumb, McCullum). Players who at the national level are enemies become team mates (thawing some rivalries). Young players are given exposure to quality players. Players become mercenaries. 20/20 is silly, but, if it is to remain the CL and the IPL are the best place for it.

POSTED BY
Paul-in-Finland
on | October 28, 2012, 19:56 GMT

I wonder how many negative comments come from non-Aussies ? Like best teams were not in the final etc... Let's face it Sydney Thumped them , best bowling side AND best batting side on the day won, dropped catches - opp clangers : Lions, Golden Bat of the event : Not Bodi but Lumb ....most wickets Starc....no I am not from Sydney, I'm from Melbourne so those of you who know - know the rivalry. So negative comment : just deal with it.

POSTED BY
jackthelad
on | October 28, 2012, 19:52 GMT

Shows how coming out of left field will always beat over-preparation. Test teams could take a certain portion of understanding from this - the game of cricket (which is about individuals performing on the day for varied and largely unaccountable reasons) has been straightjacketted by these nonsensical this that and the other coaches. Cricket is a simple and a beautiful game, there is no such thing as 'sports science'; the fact that you can do more push-ups or track courses than someone else doesn't mean you canplay cricket. One remembers with joy Ian Botham putting out his fag to go out and make 149 at Headingley. Back to basics, lads, and sack all these pointless hangers-on.

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 19:41 GMT

this has been the most boring tournament of t20 ever...having no excitement at all :-|

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 19:30 GMT

There's a lot to much of this fast food cricket now. It has become tedious.

POSTED BY
keithmillersmesserschmitt
on | October 28, 2012, 19:11 GMT

Sorry, Sidharth, but Sydney is in *Eastern* Australia. Only a Queenslander would consider NSW a "southern state". I think most people would think of Victoria, Tasmania, and South Australia.

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 18:58 GMT

I told you SS will win this tournament, clearly played the best Cricket by a distance. This also proves that the service of Shane Watson is not required. Regardless next time there will be a proper Champions League where every country have their Champions so fans can be at least interested.

POSTED BY
one-eyed-but-keepinitreal
on | October 28, 2012, 18:56 GMT

@Zan46 - I just looked at the squads of your two best teams in the competition and I can see why they were knocked out in the qualifier by sides that performed poorly in the main rounds. The sixers had to put up with their province (NSW) being split, some of their remaining players being farmed to other teams, the recall of the "player" of the recent 20/20 WC (Watto) prior to the finals, and a metrosexual hot pink (Mangenta?) uniform. Although they almost lost the semifinal from a superior position they looked the best team throughout the tournament and backed it up. This is difficult to do given the nature of the 20/20 lottery as one amazing inning or a flurry of wickets can dramatically change a game (re semifinal sixers almost lost). rememer Pollard (missing) almost made a very ordinary T&T look like world beaters the year NSW won. Congrats to the Lions, the second best permormer, unfortunately a poor start, on a belter, can mean a good side will get beaten easily.

POSTED BY
landl47
on | October 28, 2012, 18:54 GMT

Very impressive display by Sydney throughout the tournament. I hadn't seen much of Josh Hazlewood before, but he looks a terrific prospect. Great action, tall, accurate and does a bit with the ball. He's quick, though not as quick as Cummins, but he looks a better bowler than Cummins at the moment. With these three and Pattinson, Aus has a wonderful array of young talented pace bowlers. Great to watch.

POSTED BY
ladycricfan
on | October 28, 2012, 18:53 GMT

Sixers worthy champions. It wasn't Lions day. From 9 for4 it was a difficult task. Enjoyed the tournament over all. Final could've been a bit more competitive. Congratulations Sixers.

POSTED BY
Dhutugemunu
on | October 28, 2012, 18:53 GMT

In my opinion Sixers, Lions and Daredevils were the three best teams in the tournament. Others were average teams. The best won the trophy.

POSTED BY
BobCo
on | October 28, 2012, 18:50 GMT

ummm, note to author: Sydney is in an _eastern_ state. the "southern states" are SthAus, Vic and Tas... No one really knows why Captain Cook called the place New South Wales, but its clear he was using "south" to refer to south of Britain, not the southern part of the land mass (he hadn't yet seen north of NSW when he named it!).

Awful final really. Sydney were too good. Bodi, awful, and I don't think do Kock played a single ball with a straight bat (he really looked 19 this game). maybe mckenzie should have pushed himself to 3, given his form and experience. the dropped catches didn't make a lick of difference to the result either. The game was already gone by the time Haddin and Lumb were dropped.

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 18:46 GMT

splutter...cough...cough..choke..choke - that's what happened. And yes - I am a frustrated saffa, sick of this nonsense. TIME TO SNAP OUT OF IT SAFFA'S!

POSTED BY
Zan46
on | October 28, 2012, 18:40 GMT

From Canada - pathetic! - Lions did not have the experience to defend a low score.

POSTED BY
JG2704
on | October 28, 2012, 18:27 GMT

Well , have to say congrats to Sydney for a thoroughly professional performance but as a neutral I'd like to have seen a better contests - as it looked on paper. Well played the bowlers of SS (esp O Keefe) but a shame from a contests point of view that Lumb was dropped early on and that Phangiso couldn't repeat his tournament form with the ball. From an England fan this inns from Lumb makes it even more baffling that he wasn't given a chance in the WC , which I said he should have been given at the time

POSTED BY
Cpt.Meanster
on | October 28, 2012, 18:21 GMT

@AzAb12754: Yeah right ! Tell that to many domestic players around the world who don't get much opportunities to play at this level. Thanks for being selfish. What has test cricket done that's credible enough to help players gain financial freedom ? NOTHING. I find this tournament EXTREMELY meaningful. Sure, the format is slightly wrong. I am sure they will correct that in the future editions. This tournament is the PINNACLE of domestic cricket. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Peace.

POSTED BY
Zan46
on | October 28, 2012, 17:51 GMT

Seems that Bodi was the 12th man for Sydney. Gave away his wicket and then dropped a catch that could have changed the game, now he is off the field.

POSTED BY
Zan46
on | October 28, 2012, 17:01 GMT

What an embarrasment! - yet we cannot include the better teams in the final groups

POSTED BY
AzAb12754
on | October 28, 2012, 15:34 GMT

haha...The trophy looks almost exactly like the Football Champions League. Cricket is not Football incomparable. This event is actually a waste in my opinion and as a fan don't find this 'Champions' league that enjoyable. Good luck though to the teams playing in the final. I hope this is the end of T20 for a long while now.

No featured comments at the moment.

POSTED BY
AzAb12754
on | October 28, 2012, 15:34 GMT

haha...The trophy looks almost exactly like the Football Champions League. Cricket is not Football incomparable. This event is actually a waste in my opinion and as a fan don't find this 'Champions' league that enjoyable. Good luck though to the teams playing in the final. I hope this is the end of T20 for a long while now.

POSTED BY
Zan46
on | October 28, 2012, 17:01 GMT

What an embarrasment! - yet we cannot include the better teams in the final groups

POSTED BY
Zan46
on | October 28, 2012, 17:51 GMT

Seems that Bodi was the 12th man for Sydney. Gave away his wicket and then dropped a catch that could have changed the game, now he is off the field.

POSTED BY
Cpt.Meanster
on | October 28, 2012, 18:21 GMT

@AzAb12754: Yeah right ! Tell that to many domestic players around the world who don't get much opportunities to play at this level. Thanks for being selfish. What has test cricket done that's credible enough to help players gain financial freedom ? NOTHING. I find this tournament EXTREMELY meaningful. Sure, the format is slightly wrong. I am sure they will correct that in the future editions. This tournament is the PINNACLE of domestic cricket. If you don't like it, don't watch it. Peace.

POSTED BY
JG2704
on | October 28, 2012, 18:27 GMT

Well , have to say congrats to Sydney for a thoroughly professional performance but as a neutral I'd like to have seen a better contests - as it looked on paper. Well played the bowlers of SS (esp O Keefe) but a shame from a contests point of view that Lumb was dropped early on and that Phangiso couldn't repeat his tournament form with the ball. From an England fan this inns from Lumb makes it even more baffling that he wasn't given a chance in the WC , which I said he should have been given at the time

POSTED BY
Zan46
on | October 28, 2012, 18:40 GMT

From Canada - pathetic! - Lions did not have the experience to defend a low score.

POSTED BY
on | October 28, 2012, 18:46 GMT

splutter...cough...cough..choke..choke - that's what happened. And yes - I am a frustrated saffa, sick of this nonsense. TIME TO SNAP OUT OF IT SAFFA'S!

POSTED BY
BobCo
on | October 28, 2012, 18:50 GMT

ummm, note to author: Sydney is in an _eastern_ state. the "southern states" are SthAus, Vic and Tas... No one really knows why Captain Cook called the place New South Wales, but its clear he was using "south" to refer to south of Britain, not the southern part of the land mass (he hadn't yet seen north of NSW when he named it!).

Awful final really. Sydney were too good. Bodi, awful, and I don't think do Kock played a single ball with a straight bat (he really looked 19 this game). maybe mckenzie should have pushed himself to 3, given his form and experience. the dropped catches didn't make a lick of difference to the result either. The game was already gone by the time Haddin and Lumb were dropped.

POSTED BY
Dhutugemunu
on | October 28, 2012, 18:53 GMT

In my opinion Sixers, Lions and Daredevils were the three best teams in the tournament. Others were average teams. The best won the trophy.

POSTED BY
ladycricfan
on | October 28, 2012, 18:53 GMT

Sixers worthy champions. It wasn't Lions day. From 9 for4 it was a difficult task. Enjoyed the tournament over all. Final could've been a bit more competitive. Congratulations Sixers.